Identifying Students at Risk, Monitoring Performance, and Determining Eligibility Within Response to Intervention: Research on Educational Need and Benefit From Academic Intervention

By M. Shinn. 2007

165 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Safety Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a8f6fa2d88c885e18aa99a8693e565d870c6feb4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. J. Newton
2. Milena A. Keller‐Margulis
3. Amy N. Scott
4. Rachel Brown
5. L. Danielson
6. Ann M. Mastergeorge
7. K. McGrew
8. L. Hauerwas

In Safety Research

1. J. Kurth
2. J. Newton
3. Milena A. Keller‐Margulis
4. Ann M. Mastergeorge
5. K. McGrew
6. Douglas Fuchs

In Statistics and Probability

1. J. Newton
2. Milena A. Keller‐Margulis
3. L. Danielson
4. Ann M. Mastergeorge
5. K. McGrew
6. J. Kurth

Citations in the corpus

• Introduction to the special issue: Current research in Cattell–Horn–Carroll–based assessment (2010, background): “…is evident from increased examination in school psychology literature of alternative measurement approaches (e.g., curriculum-based measures and progress-monitoring tools) and/or lack of response to intervention for special education eligibility (Glover & DiPerna, 2007; Reschly, 2005; Shinn, 2007).”
• Individual Education Plan Goals and Services for Adolescents With Autism: Impact of Age and Educational Setting (2010, background): “Lastly, IEP goals and objectives are intended to be written so that students make reasonable progress on goals within the time frame allowed (Drasgow et al., 2001) while providing an educational benefit to the student with disabilities (Shinn, 2007).”
• Specific Learning Disability and Response to Intervention: State-Level Guidance (2013, background): “Some have argued that student data showing academic achievement before and during one or more interventions are adequate (Shinn, 2007).”
• Professional Development, Capacity Building, and Research Needs: Critical Issues for Response to Intervention Implementation (2007, background): “In this issue, Shinn (2007) raises the concem of which norms should be used when screening students for being at risk in reading.”
• Fidelity of implementation framework: A critical need for response to intervention models (2012, background): “The fidelity of implementation of the RtI system is arguably one of the most important components identified as necessary for RtI implementation (Burns & Gibbons, 2008; Gansle & Noell, 2007; Kovaleski, 2007; Shinn, 2007).”